I have just run a speedtest, using the well-known speedtest.net. It shows 17.41 down and 0.86 up, which is fairly typical. The download speed roughly matches what I get from decent sites if I actually time a biggish download, but...
The upload speed (which, on umpteen tests on speedtest.net and other test sites never goes above 0.87) does not match what I see when I shove my roughly 25MB patch file for the database onto my website about twice a week. My FTP programme has a little timer thingy, which consistently shows in excess of 1000 - usually around 1015 - and actual time confirms that there's nothing wrong with it if you sit down with a calculator and work it out. Only once in the last six months has it ever shown less than 1000, and that wasn't much below, can't remember the exact figure, but something in the 990s.
My theory is that this is because all the online speedtests do the same as for the download - they measure http not ftp.
Does that sound a reasonable idea to our more technologically clued-up members?
The upload speed (which, on umpteen tests on speedtest.net and other test sites never goes above 0.87) does not match what I see when I shove my roughly 25MB patch file for the database onto my website about twice a week. My FTP programme has a little timer thingy, which consistently shows in excess of 1000 - usually around 1015 - and actual time confirms that there's nothing wrong with it if you sit down with a calculator and work it out. Only once in the last six months has it ever shown less than 1000, and that wasn't much below, can't remember the exact figure, but something in the 990s.
My theory is that this is because all the online speedtests do the same as for the download - they measure http not ftp.
Does that sound a reasonable idea to our more technologically clued-up members?























